Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

...the thread is about true internal strength. Not everything is about the "internal strength" movement, for lack of a better phrase

We're on the same page, Buck. I told those mathematicians, "You all want to talk about your precious "pi" like it's something fixed and unchanging, but I'm talking about "true pi," which is sometimes exactly 3 and other times is between 2.8 and 3. Or sometimes it's 5!"

They were just too closed minded to even listen!

You know, I've been thinking that since "true internal strength" is really "mental" strength, there's no reason it can't be portrayed strictly via the internet. And since "true inner strength" is the real essence of "true aikido," in a few years all aikido teaching and training can be done over the internet. You'll be able to train hard with the greatest aikido masters in the world without leaving the comfort of your chair!!!

What a day that will be!

I think you and I should work this out together and get the patent because when these "internal strength" guys get tired of their silly physical "plug-in patch" "internal strength training," they're naturally going to look for another fad to follow. And if we play our cards right, that next thing can be "true internal strength" and full integration of all aikido training to the internet.

Let's get the patent before they try to get on our thing!

David

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

I guess people with knowledge and experience just hate to hear someone pushing unfounded and silly ideas as legitimate forms of the thing they know. For one, it's insulting to them to spout such ludicrous bilge. For another, we're well aware that lots of total newbies to aikido may read your stuff and think it's legitimate and no one with sincere teaching background wants to see people inundated with such useless thinking.

Quote:

Philip Burgess wrote:

There are other people out there, like myself, who could benefit from an Aikido class or hearing you talk as a military person on true internal strength.

Buck: that's what he is talking about. Why aren't you listening.

It's like saying to a mathematician, "But I want to hear you talk about true pi, which can be either exactly 3, somewhere between 2.8 and 3, or sometimes maybe 4."

Quote:

Philip Burgess wrote:

Like making it through a tough situation. Why expend all your time on this game you want to play? I think you have a lot of valuable knowledge to share in terms of building confidence, and character, over coming difficulties reaching deep down in side and getting internal strength, and how the relates to Aikido, since you are an Aikidoka. Be the the bridge, not the troll - you know that old story "Bill Goat Gruff", faciliate the positive. Don't prove me wrong.

Buck....take a deep breath, buddy. And tell yourself, "The first foundation of character is unswerving devotion to the truth." Then start building character in yourself by giving up the need to redefine a globally-understood term to your own peculiar and idiosyncratic meaning.

There's where you start.

Hoping for you.

David

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

He's not alone in that, nor is he alone in appropriating words from the English language (such as "internal strength") and claiming ownership over what they are allowed to mean.

The problem here is that "internal strength" is a longstanding translation of the concept of neijia in the Chinese martial arts and it has also been used for literally decades to describe the same kind of thing in Japanese martial arts. It's not like "internal strength" has only been used in the last couple of months and so its meaning is still up for grabs.

David

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

The problem here is that "internal strength" is a longstanding translation ..... It's not like "internal strength" has only been used in the last couple of months and so its meaning is still up for grabs.

David

Alternatively,

`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'
`The question is,' said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so many different things.'
`The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master -- that's all.'

Rob, believe me, I'm well acquainted with Buck's "argumentation". I have been there and done that, as have many others. But if you view it as outrageous that he would co-opt a phrase and redefine it for its own purposes, can you see that you and your camp are doing, if not quite the same thing, something along that spectrum? You too claim ownership of terms. You claim that you own the definition of what is "internal strength", and assert that no one can possibly have it who hasn't drunk your kool-ade...and hey, it may be fabulous kool-ade, but that's not really the point. The point is that while Buck is serving up who knows what and smiling and saying, "My kool-ade is just as good as your kool-ade", you are yelling, "We are the only kool-ade stand in town, and the rest of you are NOT SELLING KOOL-ADE!" Honestly, it's enough to make a person stick to plain water.

Why don't you do like the others are, have a seminar. You can charge $100 bucks a pop and teach those who have more Aikido experience than you how to make their Aikido better by learning "Aikido, My Way" with "True Internal Strength". You can have free advertising here on Aikiweb by posting ad infinitum about yourself.

...if you view it as outrageous that he would co-opt a phrase and redefine it for its own purposes, can you see that you and your camp are doing, if not quite the same thing, something along that spectrum? You too claim ownership of terms.

Not at all, Mary. The term "internal strength" is well established as a reference for "internal martial arts" and has been a central aspect of MA discussions for years and years and years. It would be hard to pick a more ridiculous target to try to co-opt--especially when the re-definition is so remotely unrelated to the actual meaning. Of course, "Brand Name" aikido has so successfully redefined the nature of aikido itself to the point that people like Buck believe that the internal mechanics are "recent add-ons" or "plug-ins" when in fact Ueshiba demonstrated these things all the time.

Quote:

Mary Malmros wrote:

You claim that you own the definition of what is "internal strength", and assert that no one can possibly have it who hasn't drunk your kool-ade...and hey, it may be fabulous kool-ade, but that's not really the point.

Again, Mary, you miss the point so elegantly that it begins to seem to be your basic intent. Neither Rob nor any of the other IS proponents claim to "own the definition," of IS. But the many, many long and on-going discussions of the subject have established its meaning. Or are you saying that mathematicians "claim to own" the definition of "pi"? No, it's just a matter of Buck's strenuous efforts to redefine a term that has been well established for a long time. Pointless and ridiculous, which is why it gets ridiculed.

Second, no one claims that "no one can possibly have it who hasn't drunk your kool-ade"--certainly not Rob Liberti. Ark didn't drink Dan's "kool ade" and Forrest Chang didn't drink Mike's "kool ade". They all developed the skills of internal strength separately through relentless investigation of internal martial arts. In other words, "internal strength" is the technical essence of internal martial arts. And that internal strength is far from a monolithic thing. There are many methods and different approaches to developing and using internal strength in these arts. Bagua's internal strength and usage of that strength is very different from Xing Yi's development and usage; and Tai Ji's development and usage is different from both of those. Those three are the internal martial arts of China and they all vary. On top of that, many "external" martial arts include some degree of "internal" training, so there are many sources and many different versions that all fall within a fairly wide range of methods but have certain consistent qualities. So where do you get that anyone said "no one can possibly have it who hasn't drunk your kool ade?

Quote:

Mary Malmros wrote:

The point is that while Buck is serving up who knows what and smiling and saying, "My kool-ade is just as good as your kool-ade", you are yelling, "We are the only kool-ade stand in town, and the rest of you are NOT SELLING KOOL-ADE!" Honestly, it's enough to make a person stick to plain water.

Unless your version of "plain water" includes "energy supplements" and "artificial flavorings and sweeteners" like a lot of what's sold as "water" these days.

That's really more like the truth. There are a lot of people hawking that stuff as water when we can simply analyze the content and see who has plain water. And since internal mechanics was certainly a major part of Ueshiba's aikido, you need to recognize that the IS camp is simply searching for pure water instead of a brand name "Aikido (TM) water."

David

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

Why don't you do like the others are, have a seminar. You can charge $100 bucks a pop and teach those who have more Aikido experience than you how to make their Aikido better by learning "Aikido, My Way" with "True Internal Strength". You can have free advertising here on Aikiweb by posting ad infinitum about yourself.

David

I think that already happened once David.

The guy tried to shoot on George Ledyard. :O

B,
R (OMG)

Ron Tisdale
-----------------------
"The higher a monkey climbs, the more you see of his behind."
St. Bonaventure (ca. 1221-1274)

Rob, believe me, I'm well acquainted with Buck's "argumentation". I have been there and done that, as have many others. But if you view it as outrageous that he would co-opt a phrase and redefine it for its own purposes, can you see that you and your camp are doing, if not quite the same thing, something along that spectrum? You too claim ownership of terms. You claim that you own the definition of what is "internal strength", and assert that no one can possibly have it who hasn't drunk your kool-ade...and hey, it may be fabulous kool-ade, but that's not really the point. The point is that while Buck is serving up who knows what and smiling and saying, "My kool-ade is just as good as your kool-ade", you are yelling, "We are the only kool-ade stand in town, and the rest of you are NOT SELLING KOOL-ADE!" Honestly, it's enough to make a person stick to plain water.

As a martial term of the art, "內勁"has a pretty specific meaning of internal strength. The term internal strength when applied to martial arts in general has a fairly specific context in which it is used and which has existed as a term of the art for several centuries (at least according to Wikipedia).

As pointed out earlier, Phillip is referring to a different concept of which we have other more appropriate words in the english language to describe. If Phillip had selected a different word then perhaps this discussion would be in a different sub forum.

As a martial term of the art, "內勁"has a pretty specific meaning of internal strength. The term internal strength when applied to martial arts in general has a fairly specific context in which it is used and which has existed as a term of the art for several centuries (at least according to Wikipedia).

As pointed out earlier, Phillip is referring to a different concept of which we have other more appropriate words in the english language to describe. If Phillip had selected a different word then perhaps this discussion would be in a different sub forum.

My Pop use to refer to it as "mental toughness" and "instestinal fortitude."

As a martial term of the art, "內勁"has a pretty specific meaning of internal strength. The term internal strength when applied to martial arts in general has a fairly specific context in which it is used and which has existed as a term of the art for several centuries (at least according to Wikipedia).

As pointed out earlier, Phillip is referring to a different concept of which we have other more appropriate words in the english language to describe. If Phillip had selected a different word then perhaps this discussion would be in a different sub forum.

I was unaware of Mike Sigman's magazine titled similarly, and the another web thngy by the same title that came up associated to Mike. Might be the point of contention for some with my use of true internal strength. Might be a branding issue. I don't know.

Going back on track. I guess terms are differently used in different circles, dialects, and places. I have allways associated the term internal strength with what I talked about. I hope These definitions helps to further define what I mean. And some other interesting stuff. First from Websters (internal see 2nd defination):

Main Entry: inĚterĚnal
Pronunciation: \in-ˈtər-nəl, ˈin-ˌ\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English internalle, from Latin internus; akin to Latin inter between
Date: 15th century
1 : existing or situated within the limits or surface of something: as a (1) : situated near the inside of the body (2) : situated on the side toward the median plane of the body b : of, relating to, or occurring on the inside of an organized structure (as a club, company, or state) <internal affairs>
2 : relating or belonging to or existing within the mind
3 : intrinsic, inherent <internal evidence of forgery in a document>
4 : present or arising within an organism or one of its parts <internal stimulus>
5 : applied or intended for application through the stomach by being swallowed <an internal remedy>

— inĚterĚnalĚiĚty \ˌin-ˌtər-ˈna-lə-tē\ noun

— inĚterĚnalĚly \in-ˈtər-nəl-ē\ adverb

Main Entry: strength
Pronunciation: \ˈstreŋ(k)th, ˈstren(t)th\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural strengths \ˈstreŋ(k)ths, ˈstren(t)ths, ˈstreŋks\
Etymology: Middle English strengthe, from Old English strengthu; akin to Old High German strengi strong — more at strong
Date: before 12th century
1 : the quality or state of being strong : capacity for exertion or endurance
2 : power to resist force : solidity, toughness
3 : power of resisting attack : impregnability
4 a : legal, logical, or moral force b : a strong attribute or inherent asset <the strengths and the weaknesses of the book are evident>
5 a : degree of potency of effect or of concentration <chili peppers in varying strengths> b : intensity of light, color, sound, or odor c : vigor of expression
6 : force as measured in numbers : effective numbers of any body or organization <an army at full strength>
7 : one regarded as embodying or affording force or firmness : support <you are my love and my strength>
8 : maintenance of or a rising tendency in a price level : firmness of prices <the strength of the dollar>
9 : basis —used in the phrase on the strength of

synonyms see power

— from strength to strength : vigorously forward : from one high point to the next

3.
Mo Jing: In Search of Internal Strength
By Tu-Ky Lam
(Excerpts)
Do you know what to do when you practice zhan-zhuang? Many people do not. During zhan-zhuang, we do an exercise called "Mo-jing", which means feeling or searching for internal strength. Once we have found or built up our internal strength, it will accumulate and our internal strength will get stronger and stronger. Mo-jing requires that we have a correct posture with good zheng-li (which means opposite tension), use mind and not force, and move slowly with very small movements. We will discuss this in greater details in here.

ZHENG-LI

USE MIND AND NOT FORCE

No movement in zhan-zhuang does not mean absolutely motionless. It is mo-jing at its highest level where the movement is so tiny and not noticeable. Here our internal strength is placed at the best optimal position, ready for us to pounce at the enemy. That is why no movement is better than small movements.

http://www.geocities.com/tukylam/mojing.html
To find this “lump” and to be able to use it, we have to be very relaxed. If we use force which can make our whole body tense up, we will never find it. It will certainly help if we try to feel our body weight shifting forwards and backwards during zhan-zhuang. We usually feel the “outer” body weight which will slowly move inside our body to give us the feeling of a big lump.

Our internal strength is this big “lump” plus the movement of the whole body as described in the section “Mo-jing movements”. As for how internal strength works, see my article “How Does Hunyuanli Works?” also posted on this website.

CONCLUSION
Our internal strength is this big “lump” plus the movement of the whole body as described in the section “Mo-jing movements”. As for how internal strength works, see my article “How Does Hunyuanli Works?” also posted on this website.

“Mo cha bu” (ground rubbing or mud-walking) is the foundation of all Yiquan stepping. When doing Mo cha bu, we should not just move our foot forward or backward by itself as doing so has no strength. We should use our hips and our legs to move our foot. For example, we start from an “Embrace-a-Tree” posture with one foot in front and the other at the back with our body weight more on the back leg. Then we rotate our palms to make them face the ground with our fingers pointing the front. This is “Fu-an” ji ji zhuang (Hold and Push posture in a fighting stance).

Before we lift our back foot up and move it forward, we have to shift our body weight to the front foot, and sit properly on our front leg. We lift the top of our head up, make our front foot gently push into ground and raise our body slightly. That way our back foot is lifted off the ground. We now have to use our hips and our legs to move our back foot closer to our front foot before moving it out to the front and form a fighting stance. Now the front foot becomes the back foot. We will repeat the same process to move the back foot forward again. This is how “mo ca bu” should be done. (When we practice Mo cha bu going backwards, the movements are reverse.)

In Mo cha bu, the distance between our feet is only the width of our shoulders (just like when we stand in the “Embrace-a-Tree” posture). The distance can be much widened to become a big stepping exercise (twice as wide). The movements are exactly the same as in Mo cha bu except that the speed is faster and we move forward with our head leading the move and our back leg pushes our body forwards.

Another useful stepping is that we move our front foot one step forward and our back foot follows suit. Here we should remember to use our head to lead the move and our back leg to push our body forwards. With this kind of stepping, we can move in a straight line forward or move diagonally forward in a 45 degree angle. All the stepping should be trained in backward movements as well.

Stepping is good training to our legs. It complements shi-li movements in which we mainly use our hands. Of course, we also practice shi-li with stepping, which is much harder because we do two at the same time. But if we can do stepping (Zou bu) and shi-li well respectively, with some effort we can quickly combine the two. Stepping is useful in push-hands and sparring. Good stepping can confuse our opponents and can help us attack more efficiently. It can also help us step out of danger quickly.

Other points of interest for some:http://www.geocities.com/tukylam/mojing.htmlHow Does "Hun yuan li" Works?http://www.geocities.com/tukylam/hunyuanli.htmlSTEPPING
Before we lift our back foot up and move it forward, we have to shift our body weight to the front foot, and sit properly on our front leg. We lift the top of our head up, make our front foot gently push into ground and raise our body slightly. That way our back foot is lifted off the ground. We now have to use our hips and our legs to move our back foot closer to our front foot before moving it out to the front and form a fighting stance. Now the front foot becomes the back foot. We will repeat the same process to move the back foot forward again. This is how "mo ca bu" should be done. (When we practice Mo cha bu going backwards, the movements are reverse.)

1) So in Yiquan one should raise the foot by stretching the other leg? One wonders how they manage to perform kicks...
2) The only way I know to move my feet is to use my hips and legs, as the muscles in my feet move the toes. (Unless I'm doing a hand stand or something. ) So as an explanation on how 'mo ca bu' should be done, it is not helpful.
3) What has Yiquan stepping to do with your True Internal Strength?

1) So in Yiquan one should raise the foot by stretching the other leg? One wonders how they manage to perform kicks...
2) The only way I know to move my feet is to use my hips and legs, as the muscles in my feet move the toes. (Unless I'm doing a hand stand or something. ) So as an explanation on how 'mo ca bu' should be done, it is not helpful.
3) What has Yiquan stepping to do with your True Internal Strength?

To be fair to Buck, that quote isn't too far off Joep.
You do use the left leg to "kick" with the right leg.
There's a "stretch" component that allows for this kind of movement. It's not immediately obvious, takes some conditioning, but once you get it, you would never think of going back to the other way of kicking.

and to be fair to Joep though, as far as 3) is concerned:
Absolutely nothing

To be fair to Buck, that quote isn't too far off Joep.
You do use the left leg to "kick" with the right leg.
There's a "stretch" component that allows for this kind of movement. It's not immediately obvious, takes some conditioning, but once you get it, you would never think of going back to the other way of kicking.

Agreed, but when I read this

Quote:

We lift the top of our head up, make our front foot gently push into ground and raise our body slightly. That way our back foot is lifted off the ground.[emphasis mine]

I see someone bobbing up and down while walking, because to raise his foot off the ground, he keeps his body rigid and extends the supporting leg. Then he moves the foot forwards and puts it on the ground by bending the supporting (back) leg. Not a good way to step, in my opinion.
A better description would be: "We lift the top of our head up, make our front foot gently push into ground [that's up-down contradictory tension and groundpath if you're generous] and draw the back foot upwards and inwards."
Apart from the bobbing issue, it becomes clear that lifting the foot is not really different from moving the foot forwards. (And thus there is no need to talk about moving the foot with the legs and hips, which is the only way to move your foot anyhow.)

So perhaps the quote is not too far off, but it's far enough off to lead you in the wrong direction. Especially since it doesn't mention the conditioning that is needed. If nobody tells you about the 'stretch', you probably won't discover it and end up doing it wrong.

A better description would be: "We lift the top of our head up, make our front foot gently push into ground [that's up-down contradictory tension and groundpath if you're generous] and draw the back foot upwards and inwards."

Yup, in definite agreement on this. The front foot pushing into the ground is a dead giveaway that it's supposed to be kokyu ryoku/jin.

I think your comments just serve as another reminder as to why this stuff can't be picked up by simply reading.

Pretty much all the Asian martial arts use or previously used some degree of qi and jin (ki and kokyu) skills. So to call jin or suit stuff "internal" is not accurate unless you specify that it has to do with "internal strength" ("nei jin" in Chinese). Both "internal styles" (nei jia) and "external styles" (wai jia) have "nei gongs" ("internal exercises") that develop "nei jin".

When someone says that Taijiquan, Xingyquan, Baguazhang, Wujiquan, Liu He Ba Fa, etc., are "internal styles", the general inference points to the fact that they use the dantien as a major motivator of all movements and the "six harmonies" natural winding of the body is present. The problem is that there is no clear line, in many cases, where some style fully or partially or not-very-much uses the dantien.

In a case I was talking about to someone in p.m., I noted that a certain Taiji person actually had a strong Bajiquan (fairly linear, but very powerful) way of moving. But Baji is a so-called "external martial art" and Taiji is an "internal martial art", so what the crossover highlights is that the basic qi and jin skills are common. The mode of movement is different enough that just about anyone with a modicum of experience can spot the Baji dominance in a supposed Taiji expert.

In Aikido there is a similar problem. Watching Ueshiba perform some swordwork in the 1930's (on film) I could see that he had more idea of store-and-release than I would have thought. And because movements get smaller with practice over the years, it's a hard thing to pick up in later films of him. I've never seen Tohei do this sort of thing even though I've watched many films very closely; in my opinion Tohei does not know how to do them. So the point I'd make is that there is a potential disparity between Ueshiba's use of the dantien/hara and that of Tohei. It's enough of a disparity that it's similar to the "internal" versus "external" discussion in CMA's. So what's the correct mode of training for Aikido?

If my evaluation of Ueshiba's movement and knowledge is correct, then Ueshiba used backbow and dantien in a whole-body method that was different from Tohei's more linear use of qi and jin. Both Ueshiba and Tohei used the soft-repetition method of developing suit to augment their jin, but I suspect that Ueshiba's training was probably more vigorous and broad-spectrum, overall. I don't think that either of these men used any of the more Shaolin-derived methods of extended tension and "squeezing" conditioning, that I see offered as substitutes for Ueshiba's qi and jin development methods. I.e., I tend to suggest people do a little thinking about exactly the mode of training that was used originally.

There are a number of methods to train "nei jin". Traditionally, the extended postures, "structure", dynamic-tension, etc., approaches are more from the "external" modes. The softer approach of jin training accompanied with breathing/suit training are going to mark the "internal styles". Being extraordinarily strong and conditioned though isn't going to handle the question of just how "wholebody" a method is, nor does it address the question of how dominant is the control of the dantien/hara. As I've said before, there are many levels and gradations of these skills.